On debate, and seeing UFO's, and not being "fine"

Forced psychiatric drugging got some news coverage that compared two court room cases going on at same time in Alaska.

AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS is an interesting report by NY Times reporter Alex Berenson published today, 24 March 2008, in International Herald Tribune, about two court cases going on in Alaska... and contrasting the two.

A fascinating comparison and I appreciated it.

But I notice that Mr. Berenson said only one point in the two courtrooms "was BEYOND debate" (my emphasis) ....

The journalist argues that a person with a psychiatric label was not "fine," and that this was not debatable.

Oh really?

Back in high school I did pretty well in debate. It was widely acknowledged -- and who am I to argue -- that I was better than my debate partner for four years who went on to become a psychiatrist by the way.

This brings up a good example of what ought to be called "sanism." You've heard of racism... sexism... maybe ableism and classism... but sanism? That's discriminating against an individual because of their psychiatric label.

I took reporter Berenson up on his "beyond debate" challenge, to show him there is a bit of debate indeed.... below is my e-mail to the reporter (followed by his report). Feel free to forward, and add a civil note to Mr. Berenson at berenson@nytimes.com

If the word "fine" can impact whether or not we end up getting forcibly drugged, then I would easily argue either none of us is "fine," or all of us is "fine." In fact, there have been religions and philosophers through the ages who argue that each and every precious human -- each life source in fact -- is "fine," even if it is harmed or extremely different.

I don't have to convince you. I just need to show you there is indeed a "debate."

I think, while it's extra effort, we ought to apply the basic journalist ethics to our constituency too.

Two courtrooms, two floors of the Nesbett courthouse, two views ofZyprexa.

In courtroom 403, lawyers read corporate memos to the jury deciding thefate of a lawsuit brought by the state of Alaska, which was charging thedrug maker Eli Lilly with hiding the dangers of Zyprexa, itsbest-selling schizophrenia medicine.

At the same time, in courtroom 301, William Bigley had his own opinionson Zyprexa and on the other drugs he has taken since 1980 to battledemons that only he can see. On March 14, a state court judge was todecide whether Bigley should be held for 30 days in a psychiatrichospital.

Bigley, 55, told the judge that the drugs were "poison" and that he didnot need them. "I'm fine," he said. His words were undercut, however, byregular claims to having seen flying saucers and to knowing thatPresident George W Bush owned a private jet.

Of all the facts at issue in the two courtrooms, one was beyond debate.Bigley was not fine.

Even so, the hearing in the Bigley case offered a textbook illustrationof the agonizing choices mentally ill patients face as they considerwhether to take Zyprexa or other antipsychotics.

By calming the hallucinations and delusions that plague people withschizophrenia, drugs like Zyprexa allow many patients to live outsidepsychiatric institutions. But the documents discussed in room 403offered plenty of evidence that Bigley, whatever his delusions, had goodreason to dislike the medicines.

All antipsychotics have side effects, and Zyprexa's are among the worst,according to the American Diabetes Association and to independentscientists. In many patients, Zyprexa causes severe weight gain that canlead to diabetes, as well as sharply higher cholesterol and triglyceridelevels in the blood. Those are all risk factors for heart disease.

Furthermore, the documents introduced in courtroom 403 showed that formuch of the past decade, Lilly executives played down those risks. Amongthemselves, in internal e-mail messages and memos, they shared worriesthat sales of Zyprexa would fall if the drug were linked to weight gainor diabetes.

In 2002, for example, the Japanese government ordered Lilly to warnJapanese physicians against giving Zyprexa to people at high risk fordiabetes. But Lilly did not add a similar warning to Zyprexa labels inthe United States. Internally, Lilly executives acknowledged that thewarning had hurt Zyprexa sales in Japan.

"The impact of the label change in Japan has been very profound," twosenior Lilly executives wrote in a memo on July 1, 2002. "There has beena 75% drop in new patients who are being put on the drug."

Indeed, with U.S. doctors learning on their own about the connectionbetween Zyprexa and diabetes, prescriptions for the drug have fallen 50percent since 2003.

Document Actions

We are MFI

Tsuyoshi Matsuo, MD, chair of MindFreedom Japan affiliate

Tsuyoshi Matsuo is a physician who worked in a psychiatric institution in Japan for four years and witnessed how terribly the patients are treated. Dr. Matsuo said he was glad to be an MFI member, "Because I believe MFI is trying to straighten out the mental health system which is insane. I'm proud to be part of the movement to straighten it out!"